Posted on 02/28/2009 11:31:01 AM PST by BGHater
A new bill on pit bulls that hasn't even hit the Senate floor yet is already getting a lot of heat from folks on both side of the issue.
Under a bill from Sen. Bruce Starr's office, owning a pit bull would be illegal in Oregon and the state would punish those who own one by euthanizing the dog, slapping the owner with thousands of dollars in fines and perhaps even throwing them in jail. And if your pit bull killed someone? Then you could be fined $125,000, spend five years in jail or both.
Those who already own a pit bull would be grandfathered in, so to speak. They would have to obtain a permit to keep the pit bull (for a fee) and provide a certificate from a veterinarian showing that the dog had been sterilized.
Here is the summary that is laid out in the draft of the bill:
Prohibits keeping of pit bull. Creates exception for pit bulls currently in state upon meeting certain conditions. Declares pit bull dangerous dog and makes keeping of pit bull punishable by euthanization of dog and by maximum of $6,250 fine, one year's imprisonment, or both. If dog kills person, punishes by maximum of $125,000 fine, five years' imprisonment, or both. Read the entire bill (pdf)
The bill has not had a first reading on the Senate floor yet. That is expected in a week or two.
I’ve never owned a pit bull, but I do know that any state brownshirt walking up the sidewalk to kill my puppy would be in for a very bad day.
And muslims hate dogs. Next they’ll move in next door to you and start complaining about little Fido, then our illustrious public servants will bend over backwards or forwards I guess, to avoid hurting their little sensitivities
Sorry to disagree with your blanket statement but in instances where there is a clear hazard to others (ie-such as chimpanzees) the government does have an obligation to protect the public.
Notice that pit bulls rarely attacke their owners, it is usually some innocent (frequently a woman or child) who is in the wrong place at the wrong time. The frequency of pit bull aggression can't be ignored, particularly when there are 100s of other milder breeds to choose from.
In lieu of outlawing them the owner should be charged with a serious felony which would include big fines AND jail time to the same degree as if the owner himself had assaulted the victim.
(Pit bull fanatics feel free to flame - it doesn't change the facts)
I’ve had a loose pitbull attack my cat, and a pitbull running off leash with a clueless jogger attack my dog, on a leash. In both cases it’s people’s fault, not the animal’s. In both instances, had I been carrying, it would have been the end of both dogs. Another time I was driving and saw a mailman being attacked by a doberman, I drove my car into it and stopped the attack. Irresponsible dog owners, chimpanzee owners, lion and tiger owners, horse owners, teenage parents, all of them, where does it begin and end? Not with the nannies
Or eat them. Just being sarcastic. I know in some places police do shoot for no good reason. Haven't heard of that here yet, and it would get out. Sometimes I do approve their shooting dogs IF they are attacking somebody and I mean REALLY threatening the police, not just barking, you know what I'm getting at, I hope. Two different times it took several 9mm shots to take them down, maybe their aim wasn't so good, don't know. Those cases sounded justified.
Just the idea of somebody (like Obama’s busybodies) coming onto your property and killing your dog, should raise hackles in everyone
If people keep pit bulls or other dangerous breeds because they are drug suppliers, or keep them for fighting, that is a little different, too.
I agree it's a slippery slope.
I have a left leaning old high school friend that believes in “punish the deed not the breed” for pit bulls but is all for rounding up guns.
Yes, let them start in the hood, then get back to us
Our animal shelter has tons of pit bulls and pit crosses no one wants. Why can’t the owners be more responsible.
Generally, in our neck of the woods, if there is a pit bull, you probably should be suspicious of illegal/drug activity.
Owners have given this breed a bad name.
The difference is that a gun does not all of a sudden decide to attack an innocent victim - it only carries out the intent of it's owner. Animals, whether classified as wild or not, have minds and temperments of their own. Owners typically say that the attack dogs have been abused or not properly conditioned but THEIR dog would never attack anyone. Many of those who have attacked victims were thought to be mild and well tempered. So, it is not always clear why a pit bull attack is triggered.
I admit that my sensitivity is colored by an early experience.
I had a friend in his early-20s who was helping a neighbor move his furniture to his new rental. The neighbor had a pit bull, seemingly well mannered and certainly not abused, and the dog knew my friend. For some reason, while the friend was carrying out a stuffed chair the dog suddenly attacked him and latched on to his leg. By the time the owner was able to subdue the dog and get him off by whacking with a baseball bat, my friend's leg was badly lacerated with chunks missing. The only thing that saved his head and neck was that he fell backwards with the chair covering his upper body. The doctors tried to save his leg but after two weeks they finally had to amputate above the knee. My fiend's life was never the same again. Since this was in the late 50's there was not the same notariety associated with the breed as there is today. The owner, a man in his 50s was guilt-ridden about my friend and his dog as he had it put down. There were no police charges or a lawsuit but the grief stricken and depressed owner died about 5 years later from a heart attack.
One dog, two men's lives unalterably changed.
Yeah, there's that, too. I don't happen to have a dog. And it depends what they would come onto my property for. It's not just Obama people but certain other people who might want in my house, not everybody. I had no qualms about letting the police in like when I got my purse stolen and they found some of it and brought it back to me.
One of my biggest fears is not dogs but energy. With the new policies, I could get run out of my house if my utilities go much higher, and my new furnace this horrid winter, I haven't gotten a bill over $400 yet which is good. I don't average it over the year so I can save during the warmer months, but most people do now. But if they double again, I'm in trouble.
then, what's the real agenda.Socialists and Communists don't like our way of life, guns, religion, private property, you can't give an inch
They want us cooped up in government housing, just like the Soviet system
NilesJo,
I am not a pit bull owner, dont like em, wouldn’t have one...
However, maybe you don’t “need” that 50” plasma TV. You know there are smaller Tv’s that consume less power. Maybe you don’t need that truck, you should be driving a Honda Civic. Maybe you don’t need that Golden Retreiver you should have a Poodle. You know that 7.62 rifle looks awful dangerous and they use that same cartridge in wars, so maybe you should only have a .22. Maybe you don’t need to have your AC running during the afternoon we’ll just put a remote on it so we can turn it off during the day.
We live in a soemwhat free society. Along with that coems risk and responsabilities. If you feel that the government is better suited to making those decisions for you and your neighbors there are places in the world you can go where that is the norm.
If someone lets their dog bite someone take the dogs away and throw their keister in jail!
Wow horrible story. I think PitBulls have something deficient in the brain department.
Too much inbreeding and breeding for agression.
Still don’t think the government shold be able to outlaw them... Just my 2 cents...
How about their thugs owners? Does this ban them too?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.